Sign in | Register now Like us on FacebookLike Us | Follow us on TwitterFollow Us

Milwaukee's Daily Magazine for Wednesday, Aug. 27, 2014

Wed
Hi: 69
Lo: 60
Thu
Hi: 71
Lo: 66
Fri
Hi: 82
Lo: 67
Advertise on OnMilwaukee.com

In Travel & Visitors Guide Commentary

Some residents of northern and western suburbs feel underserved by Milwaukee's freeway system. (PHOTO: Andy Tarnoff )

In Travel & Visitors Guide Commentary

Only about half of the freeways proposed by planners in the 1960s were actually built. (PHOTO: Andy Tarnoff )

This sucks: Political gridlock hurts highways


Face it, we all have things we love and hate about Milwaukee. But, complaining and focusing on the negative leads nowhere. So, in this column we highlight an issue that we think needs to be addressed, discussed and solved. Every "This Sucks" feature tells you why we think something sucks, offers commentary, opinions, solutions and, of course, gives you the chance to weigh in through our exclusive Talkback feature.

What sucks: Milwaukee's current freeway system doesn't connect the rapidly growing areas of the northern and western suburbs with each other or Downtown.

The increase in population and motor vehicle traffic in Germantown, Jackson, West Bend, Slinger, Cedarburg, Grafton, Saukville and other developing communities will coincide with the continuing deterioration of the current system and could result in gridlock on the roads and in the political system.

Why it sucks: Compared to other cities, Milwaukee's traffic problems rate relatively low on the gripe-o-meter. One of the things that newcomers cite as refreshing about the area is the ability to get just about in anywhere in "15 or 20 minutes."

Of course, some areas are more convenient than others.

Andy Kunkler lives in Jackson, but attends a lot of events Downtown and spends a fair amount of time visiting his sister and brother-in-law at their home in Wauwatosa.

In order to get to Highway 45, the closest major freeway, he has to "backtrack" and drive west on Highway 60 before eventually heading south and east to arrive at his destination.

"There really is no quick way," Kunkler said. "A long time ago, Highway 145 used to be the major highway. It's still a pretty good route, but they never really finished it."

That's a common phenomenon in these parts.

In the 1950s and '60s, various government planners compiled a series of projections and blueprints that culminated in the Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) recommendation for 16 routes, several of which -- the East-West Freeway (I-94 and I-794), the North-South Freeway (I-43), the Zoo Freeway (Hwy. 45) and the Airport Freeway (I-894) -- form the core of the current system.

In the 1970s, the freeway-building effort began to encounter pockets of resistance. Several arteries were "stubbed" or never started.

A glance at SEWRPC reports from years ago shows projects that some travelers would welcome today, such as the Stadium Freeway, which was envisioned as a north-south artery that would run from Greenfield past the site of the old County Stadium and into Ozaukee County, where it would curve east and connect with what is now I-43. Only a small portion of the freeway, now known as US-41 to the north and Miller Park Way to the south, was completed.

Another proposal was for the Bay Freeway, an east-west link that would run from I-43 near Whitefish Bay westward to Oconomowoc. Only the westernmost portion of this road was built and it is designated as STH-16 in Pewaukee and Oconomowoc.

The Belt Freeway was proposed to connect the western and southern suburbs It was to start at the Fond du Lac Freeway in Germantown, go south through Menomonee Falls, Brookfield, New Berlin and Muskego and then dip east through Franklin and Oak Creek before connecting with the Lake Freeway. It was never built.

Given the fiscal problems facing state and local entities -- not to mention the reluctance of citizens to pay more taxes or trust their elected representatives to spend public money wisely -- it seems unlikely that any major freeway expansion will take place any time soon.

Page 1 of 2 (view all on one page)

Next >>



Talkbacks

twoaday2 | Jan. 24, 2008 at 11:19 a.m. (report)

I think this section recently removed by the Bush Admin sums my position up extremely well.... (oddly written by a Reagon neocon!) http://www.nationalcorridors.org/papers/PressRel01212008.html

Rate this:
  • Average rating: 0.0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

compujeramey | Jan. 23, 2008 at 11:48 a.m. (report)

@mkelover is it not encouraging the most freedom to not spend billions of dollars to subsidize a massive network and arbitrarily place exists in essence dictating where people live? @twoaday isn't dictating where people live, he's against spending millions of dollars to subsidize those that want to live a long way away. He's for letting the market work by not building huge systems that gobble up city land and push people to live further apart. There isn't anything at all communist at all about saying "you can live wherever, but we're not going to spend billions building a road infrastructure that carves up part of our city and clogs our air so you can get here to work and play, but not play property taxes". The nation's out of control subsidies to road travel need to be brought back in. Continually building more roads to subsidize sprawl isn't the answer. Politicians and planners need to let the market play out the forces by forcing people to deal with the expense of driving a long-time to get downtown if they want to live so far away. If they actually did that you would see a massive reinvestment in city neighborhoods as people tried to move back in to them in order to be closer to their jobs and entertainment.

Rate this:
  • Average rating: 0.0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

TheyThink | Jan. 15, 2008 at 3:17 p.m. (report)

So now you want government to tell people what kind of cars they're allowed to drive? Oy vey!

Rate this:
  • Average rating: 0.0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

twoaday2 | Jan. 15, 2008 at 3:16 p.m. (report)

mkelover... Ummm it is called supply and demand.. As you reduce the perceived cost of driving (i.e add more lanes/freeways) you increase demand.... Additionally freeway design inherently creates congestion because of its limited access. So again as you encourage more people to drive further you get... more congestion...

Rate this:
  • Average rating: 0.0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

TheyThink | Jan. 15, 2008 at 1:07 p.m. (report)

Twoaday2 - are you serious? How can expanding freeways lead to MORE congestion?? If the freeways are congested right now, how does expanding them NOT relieve congestion in some way? Why are you so against people living/working where they want to live/work? A longer commute is not a big deal as long as you're maintaining the best fuel economy during that ride...gridlock produces more congestion, so the solution is to reduce gridlock by expansion in some way. Dictating where people live is about the most un-American thing I can think of. As much as some people want us to emulate some European countries, it's not going to happen...we are an automobile-based country and that's not going to change anytime soon, no matter what communistic-style rules you try to put in place to tell people where they can and cannot live/work.

Rate this:
  • Average rating: 0.0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Show me the other 8 Talkbacks
13 comments about this article.
Post a comment / write a review.

Facebook Comments

Disclaimer: Please note that Facebook comments are posted through Facebook and cannot be approved, edited or declined by OnMilwaukee.com. The opinions expressed in Facebook comments do not necessarily reflect those of OnMilwaukee.com or its staff.